Hacker News Reader

Reproducibility. What's worrying is the surprisingly large number of papers that are not reproducible. Most of that is likely not because of fraud though.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002228281...

The general thing that's supposed to stop this is replication -- when an experiment is published, another researcher should be able to replicate the results.

Here's an example of researchers being caught doing exactly this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_contact_changes_minds

Not unheard of, but usually there are credentials and reputations behind researchers' names which other peer-reviewers/editors will know. Many articles are invited articles or follow-ups to previous articles. Seems very unlikely that most reputable scientists would put their careers on the line for provably fraudulent data when they can just p-hack or use biased methods on actual data. It's much easier to get caught fabricating, than cutting corners or using biased approaches.